The Roe Countdown

[JoeMorgue]

All of our political structure is based upon accounting for "bad agents" who at least don't want to break the system.

That's why, and I'll get crap for this, before Trump I actually thought the in the modern era American politics was remarkably free of corruption. We talk of Nixon in this hushed tones like he was the Boogeyman but really his stuff, not to defend it or downplay it, was personal vindictive skullduggery. It was never a threat to the concept of democracy.

We've had godawful Presidents but none of them declared war on the concept of Democracy itself. When Bush and Gore split the vote it was politically dirty and shady, but it never went beyond that.

Reagan, both Bushes were horrible Presidents but I don't think either one of them ever work up and literally said to themselves "I'm going to intentionally and knowingly do things that hurt this country to help myself."

 

[Suddenly]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=1375&pictureid=13141[/qimg]

Not a surprise

They are lawyers. None of these are statements that they will not overturn Roe.

I mean, at one point Plessy v. Ferguson was all of those things and any of the judges in Brown v. Board could and probably would have said these things.

There is plenty about all of this that is deplorable, but this angle is silly.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Yeah let's point out they are liars and hypocrites a hundred more times, maybe they just haven't heard us yet and the 101st time will be the time that sticks and they resign in shame.

 

[Stacyhs]

Susan Collins has issued a statement: she's 'disappointed'.

Good job, fool.

 

[cosmicaug]

I don't understand this, and admittedly I'm a bit of a dope on some legal things, but if protecting abortion rights passed through the House, Senate and White House, on what grounds could SCOTUS overturn it? It would be codified. Has this happened before and I don't know about it? Where they've actually taken a law that's passed through all houses and they've overturned it on Constitutional grounds? I'll plead ignorance.

What part of them being the ones who get to decide what is constitutional are you having trouble with?

They can create whatever contorted arguments they want to use. They are only limited by their imagination.

However, it doesn't take any imagination whatsoever. It only takes recognizing fetal personhood to be able to say that the 14th Amendment applies from conception onward (while ignoring the competing rights of the motherincubator) and to also say that that makes any law allowing or guaranteeing the choice to have an abortion unconstitutional.

 

[crescent]

Interesting twitter thread regarding Barret's responses during confirmation hearings. The gist of it was she was misquoted/partially quoted out of context.

Here's an example of the misquote, which starts out the thread:

Amy Coney Barret in confirmation hearing: "Cases [like Roe] are so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling."

But here's the full quote, with bolding/highlighting added:

"to define cases that are so well-settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling. And I'm answering a lot of question about Roe, which I think indicates that Roe doesn't fall in that category."

So she never said she would not overturn Roe v Wade, nor that it was settled law. If anything, she said the opposite. I think some of the other justices might have perjured themselves during confirmation hearings, but it does not look like Barret did. People just didn't quite seem to grok what she meant.

 

[Tero]

What about the states? Don't they have the right to rule abortion now?

No: Supreme court gives states full power in all things to do with everyday life. Except: guns, abortion. Then they decide.

 

[JoeMorgue]

What about the states? Don't they have the right to rule abortion now?

Technically. 26 (last time I checked) states had so called "Trigger" laws on the books, banning abortions the moment Roe V Wade was overturned and I'm sure those are going into effect as we speak.

The 24 remaining states technically can still keep abortion legal, but let's see how long that lasts.

 

[Suddenly]

Reagan, both Bushes were horrible Presidents but I don't think either one of them ever work up and literally said to themselves "I'm going to intentionally and knowingly do things that hurt this country to help myself."

Eh.

You aren't wrong.

Another way of putting it is that in this era politicians have overwhelmingly agreed that the loss of political power carried less cost than the destruction of the norm based system we have built.

The GOP was already moving towards deciding that this no longer applied, and Trump was the accelerant. Conservatives have seen themselves in a demographic death spiral for some time and the only way for them to keep power is to move away from Democracy. They've been banging on voting rights, gerrymandering to control state governments, and capturing the courts to that end.

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

I'm with the other monkey about it being time for another amendment to the Constitution. Has there been even one since the Equal Rights Amendment in the 70s?

 

[crescent]

What about the states? Don't they have the right to rule abortion now?

That's exactly what this does. The SC has not outlawed abortion. Roe v Wade prevented states from outlawing abortion. That's gone now, so states can ban abortion - but abortion is not banned by federal law.

So I live in Colorado. Abortion is and will continue to be legal here, this decision results in no legal change here. I used to live in Utah, this decision probably changes things there because they have probably trigger laws in place (I have not done the research to be certain about Utah though.)

Another aside: We keep talking about the Supreme Court overturning laws. That does not seem to be what happened here - it is more that the current Supreme Court nullified a previous Supreme Court decision. Roe v Wade was an SC decision regarding the constitutionality of a law, not an actual law unto itself.

 

[cosmicaug]

All of our political structure is based upon accounting for "bad agents" who at least don't want to break the system.

That's why, and I'll get crap for this, before Trump I actually thought the in the modern era American politics was remarkably free of corruption. We talk of Nixon in this hushed tones like he was the Boogeyman but really his stuff, not to defend it or downplay it, was personal vindictive skullduggery. It was never a threat to the concept of democracy.

That may be mostly so but I still say that we are here because of Nixon. More specifically, we are here because of the aftermath of Nixon: the pardon of Nixon by Ford to "heal the nation" was a mistake and it led us to this in a roundabout way that went through the Reagan, Bush and Baby Bush administrations.

 

[JoeMorgue]

It's adorable that you think SCOTUS is just going to stop at overturning Roe V Wade.

Just because you live in a hippie state doesn't mean you're safe.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Yes, I understand. It's all gloom and doom right now, but I'm saying I don't think there is a process to take a law passed through the entire legislature and have it debated in court. I don't think it's possible.

Yet it has happened numerous times.

Sometimes to further rights, sometimes to take them away.

"Judicial Review" has been with us for over 200 years. It was established in the ruling of Marbury v. Madison in 1803.

ETA: ok, thoroughly covered above.

But christ on a cracker, this is introduced starting in like 3rd grade social studies all the way through high school graduation and people still don't know it.

/sigh

 

[Stacyhs]

Yeah let's point out they are liars and hypocrites a hundred more times, maybe they just haven't heard us yet and the 101st time will be the time that sticks and they resign in shame.

So you can point out to us another hundred times how we shouldn't point out their lies and hypocrisy? Maybe we haven't heard you yet and the 101st time will be the time that sticks and we never point our their lies and hypocrisy again.

 

[alfaniner]

I suggest that this thread be closed and a new thread opened. There is no more countdown. Roe v. Wade has been overturned. The forces of evil have had their way, and there is certainly worse to come.

Done -- The Roe v. Wade Strikedown

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Technically. 26 (last time I checked) states had so called "Trigger" laws on the books, banning abortions the moment Roe V Wade was overturned and I'm sure those are going into effect as we speak.

The 24 remaining states technically can still keep abortion legal, but let's see how long that lasts.

Mike Pence: Yeee-hahhh!

 

[Suddenly]

So you can point out to us another hundred times how we shouldn't point out their lies and hypocrisy? Maybe we haven't heard you yet and the 101st time will be the time that sticks and we never point our their lies and hypocrisy again.

At this point naivete about the hypocrisy is way more an issue than the hypocrisy itself.

 

[sarge]

I'm with the other monkey about it being time for another amendment to the Constitution. Has there been even one since the Equal Rights Amendment in the 70s?

Yes, there have, and there is no Equal Rights Amendment. It failed.

 

[Stacyhs]

Technically. 26 (last time I checked) states had so called "Trigger" laws on the books, banning abortions the moment Roe V Wade was overturned and I'm sure those are going into effect as we speak.

The 24 remaining states technically can still keep abortion legal, but let's see how long that lasts.

My state of Oregon has safeguarded the right to abortion into state law. This ruling does not affect that. We can expect women from Idaho now coming over the state line to get the care they are now denied in there.